Vaccine Industry to partner with police, come after home school students in Iowa for mandated quarterly “health and wellness” checks


Image: Vaccine Industry to partner with police, come after home school students in Iowa for mandated quarterly “health and wellness” checks

After the World Health Organization (WHO) named “vaccine hesitancy” a global health threat in 2019, vaccine compliance has become top priority for every government that is run by Big Pharma. FDA commissioner Scott Gottlieb has called on the states to limit vaccine exemptions and strip parents of their rights. The war to achieve max vaccine compliance is moving into new, bold territory.

The Vaccine State is now targeting home school families. Many home school families do not follow the CDC’s full vaccine schedule and some families opt out of vaccines altogether. Iowa State Representative Mary Mascher has proposed a piece of legislation that would target them in their homes, to enforce compliance. Iowa’s HF 272 would require home school families to submit proof of their child’s vaccination record to the state, while requiring the families to submit to quarterly “health and wellness” safety checks, which may be conducted by officials from the Health and Human Services Department and accompanied by local law enforcement.

HF 272 is where the Vaccine State takes its most intrusive step to date. On lines 22-24, the bill instructs all home school parents to provide the district with evidence that the child has had the immunizations “required under section 139A.8.” Furthermore, parents would be required to submit a full portfolio of the child’s school work, including an “outline of course of study,” all subjects covered, all lesson plans, and a time log for each area of study. The bill is both intrusive and dishonest. Even parents who send their kids to public school can opt out of one or all vaccines that are recommended by the CDC. Religious and medical exemptions to vaccines still exist in the state.

The power of the elements: Discover Colloidal Silver Mouthwash with quality, natural ingredients like Sangre de Drago sap, black walnut hulls, menthol crystals and more. Zero artificial sweeteners, colors or alcohol. Learn more at the Health Ranger Store and help support this news site.

https://www.brighteon.com/embed/5828132245001

School districts to “conduct quarterly health and safety home visits” and may enlist law enforcement if parents don’t give consent

To enforce the new rules, the bill instructs the board of directors of the school district to “conduct quarterly home visits to check on the health and safety” of children within the district. The bill provides adequate funding for the school district to police home school families in the area. The visits are to be conducted within the home and include an observation of the child and an interview with the child. If the parent does not consent, then the district can obtain probable cause from the juvenile court to forcefully enter the home and conduct the observation and the interview. The superintendent of the school district shall “designate a person to carry out the duties.” This person is designated as the “mandatory reporter.” Most sickening, the school district may collaborate with the department of human services and “local, county and service area officers” to enter the home and conduct the checkup.

Since officers are required to “do their job,” they will be critical for intimidating parents to open their doors and submit their kid to the intrusive interview and the vaccine requirements. If parents do not cooperate and hand over proof of vaccination records, it will be very easy for Child Protective Services to take the child from the home, have them vaccinated, and sent away to live with another family.

In Oregon, lawmakers want to enforce vaccine compliance as soon as parents take their newborns home from the hospital. Under a proposal in Oregon, every new parent, including adoptions, would be visited two or three times by a nurse or health care practitioner. The visits are intended to connect parents with primary care physicians, screen them, and schedule their myriad of vaccinations.

These intrusive bills are a glimpse of how far the authoritarian Vaccine State will go to achieve vaccine compliance and force people to obey. Home school families must be ready to hold their elected representatives accountable, as to not permit pharmaceutical companies the ability to create laws and turn law enforcement against good people.

Advertisements

Vaccine Industry to partner with police, come after home school students in Iowa for mandated quarterly “health and wellness” checks


 

Image: Vaccine Industry to partner with police, come after home school students in Iowa for mandated quarterly “health and wellness” checks

After the World Health Organization (WHO) named “vaccine hesitancy” a global health threat in 2019, vaccine compliance has become top priority for every government that is run by Big Pharma. FDA commissioner Scott Gottlieb has called on the states to limit vaccine exemptions and strip parents of their rights. The war to achieve max vaccine compliance is moving into new, bold territory.

The Vaccine State is now targeting home school families. Many home school families do not follow the CDC’s full vaccine schedule and some families opt out of vaccines altogether. Iowa State Representative Mary Mascher has proposed a piece of legislation that would target them in their homes, to enforce compliance. Iowa’s HF 272 would require home school families to submit proof of their child’s vaccination record to the state, while requiring the families to submit to quarterly “health and wellness” safety checks, which may be conducted by officials from the Health and Human Services Department and accompanied by local law enforcement.

HF 272 is where the Vaccine State takes its most intrusive step to date. On lines 22-24, the bill instructs all home school parents to provide the district with evidence that the child has had the immunizations “required under section 139A.8.” Furthermore, parents would be required to submit a full portfolio of the child’s school work, including an “outline of course of study,” all subjects covered, all lesson plans, and a time log for each area of study. The bill is both intrusive and dishonest. Even parents who send their kids to public school can opt out of one or all vaccines that are recommended by the CDC. Religious and medical exemptions to vaccines still exist in the state.

The power of the elements: Discover Colloidal Silver Mouthwash with quality, natural ingredients like Sangre de Drago sap, black walnut hulls, menthol crystals and more. Zero artificial sweeteners, colors or alcohol. Learn more at the Health Ranger Store and help support this news site.

https://www.brighteon.com/embed/5828132245001

School districts to “conduct quarterly health and safety home visits” and may enlist law enforcement if parents don’t give consent

To enforce the new rules, the bill instructs the board of directors of the school district to “conduct quarterly home visits to check on the health and safety” of children within the district. The bill provides adequate funding for the school district to police home school families in the area. The visits are to be conducted within the home and include an observation of the child and an interview with the child. If the parent does not consent, then the district can obtain probable cause from the juvenile court to forcefully enter the home and conduct the observation and the interview. The superintendent of the school district shall “designate a person to carry out the duties.” This person is designated as the “mandatory reporter.” Most sickening, the school district may collaborate with the department of human services and “local, county and service area officers” to enter the home and conduct the checkup.

Since officers are required to “do their job,” they will be critical for intimidating parents to open their doors and submit their kid to the intrusive interview and the vaccine requirements. If parents do not cooperate and hand over proof of vaccination records, it will be very easy for Child Protective Services to take the child from the home, have them vaccinated, and sent away to live with another family.

In Oregon, lawmakers want to enforce vaccine compliance as soon as parents take their newborns home from the hospital. Under a proposal in Oregon, every new parent, including adoptions, would be visited two or three times by a nurse or health care practitioner. The visits are intended to connect parents with primary care physicians, screen them, and schedule their myriad of vaccinations.

These intrusive bills are a glimpse of how far the authoritarian Vaccine State will go to achieve vaccine compliance and force people to obey. Home school families must be ready to hold their elected representatives accountable, as to not permit pharmaceutical companies the ability to create laws and turn law enforcement against good people.

When Should Kids Start Learning About Sex and Consent?


Late last year, California became the first state to require affirmative-consent education—education about consent that teaches “yes means yes” versus “no means no”—for public high schools that require a health class before graduation. Advocates applauded the move as a huge step in the right direction. Such education, they hoped, would help reduce the prevalence of sexual assault on college campuses and elsewhere.

But education initiatives that home in on issues of consent in high school or college may not be enough—and may be coming too late in teenagers’ lives. A recent analysis shows that, while teen dating-violence prevention programs have been shown to increase knowledge and change student attitudes, they do not actually reduce dating violence.

Many sexuality educators thus feel conflicted about the focus in the media and in the public conversation in general on affirmative consent. “I think it’s a positive step. It’s acknowledging that young people might want to say yes [to sex], and it’s giving them more space to say yes,” said Eva Goldfarb,  a sexuality educator and public-health professor at Montclair State University. “But what do parents and administrators expect to happen afterward if consent is all children know and are prepared for? We’re spending so much time on the conversation of gatekeeping,” Goldfarb continued. “It still sets a sexual dynamic that’s adversarial. Everyone wants to keep people safe, but it’s still about avoiding danger rather than exploring positive aspects of sexuality.”

Elizabeth Schroeder, a sexuality educator at both Montclair State University and Widener University, feels similarly. In zeroing in on a single problematic issue such as consent, she thinks both parents and administrators are missing the point: that unhealthy sexual behaviors can have their origins in insufficient early education, and that a more holistic approach to sexuality education can eventually lead to healthier attitudes toward sex and relationships.

Both educators believe that children would be better off with a more comprehensive understanding of sexuality, beyond just the issue of consent—one most effectively taught at a younger age as part of a larger curriculum that includes teachings on boundaries, personal autonomy, relationships, and other aspects of sexual health. This attitude reflects a growing movement among sexuality organizations and educators to advocate for comprehensive sex-education programs that begin as early as kindergarten, to provide students with age-appropriate and medically accurate information that acts as a foundation for later lessons on consent.

And adults aren’t the only ones pushing for more extensive sexuality education—teens appear to be hungry for this information as well. In a Girls’ Attitudes Survey published by Girlguiding in 2015, researchers showed girls aged 11 to 16 a list of topics in order to get an idea of what they have been taught versus what they felt they should be taught. Among the findings, researchers learned that there were some topics—especially relationships, pornography, consent, and violence against women and girls—in which education offerings fell far short of what girls wanted and needed. Similarly, a report released by the World Health Organization showed that young people felt there was a need for less information about pregnancy and STIs—which they already knew about—and more information on relationships and consent.

“Don’t pretend these behaviors or relationships aren’t happening [among young people].”
Both Schroeder and Goldfarb—both of whom have acted as consultants and co-authors on curricula released by major health and sexuality organizations—see all of this as proof that school districts need to adopt comprehensive sex-ed curricula, and that they need to start incorporating it at younger ages. Kindergartners, for example, would learn about their bodies, about boundaries, and about the different types of families that exist, while first graders would then move on to lessons about friendship and gender roles. By fifth grade, students would be ready to learn about puberty, sexual and reproductive anatomy, and sexual orientation. By following this timeline, high-school seniors would have a firm infrastructure in place in order to be ready for more complex lessons on reproductive and sexual rights, STD testing, and the human sexual response cycle. This entire body of knowledge would provide the necessary support for a greater understanding of issues such as consent.
Most parents seem to agree that such an educational structure makes sense. A number of studies show widespread parental support for comprehensive sex ed, including one from 2014 finding that the majority of parents in the U.S. support the teaching of human anatomy and reproductive information, gender and sexual-orientation issues, and more starting in elementary school. A full 40 percent of parents supported comprehensive sexuality education in general.
Lisa De La Rue, one of the authors of the aforementioned paper that showed underwhelming results from teen dating violence programs, agrees that early education can only help. “Don’t pretend these behaviors or relationships aren’t happening [among young people],” said De La Rue, who works as an assistant professor in the counseling psychology department at the University of San Francisco. “Getting more comfortable with it, understanding what it looks like, and being able to have those conversations with your children is going to set them up with a long-term outlook on what healthy dating should look like. Early intervention is key.”

Still, a more vocal minority have pushed back against this latest push for comprehensive sex ed, shocked by the thought of exposing young children to the topic of sex, and convinced that teaching about sexual activity is the same as endorsing it.

“The comprehensive sexuality education (CSE) agenda is very deceptive,” Sharon Slater, the president of the family policy advocacy group Family Watch International, told LifeSiteNews just last month while promoting her new documentary The War on Children: Exposing the Comprehensive Sexuality Education Agenda. “CSE encourages children to engage in sexual experimentation and high-risk sexual behaviors.”

“If we’re really doing our jobs from the time children are young … consent education becomes unnecessary or, hopefully, less necessary as they get older.”
Slater also launched a new website, created to “warn parents and policymakers of the serious harms of explicit comprehensive sexuality education programs.” This site contains information on how CSE harms children, and frames this form of education as one with a scandalous history and an agenda aimed at changing the gender and sexual norms of society and establishing rights for children as sexually autonomous beings.
Similarly, Miriam Grossman, a psychiatrist who regularly lectures on the topic of sex education, argues that abstinence-based education is essential to protecting children from sexually irresponsible behavior, and has published two books that explore the dangers of CSE.

Those in favor of CSE, on the other hand, are critical of abstinence-only education because of the ways in which it only teaches children about the dangers of sex and sexuality. Which is why organizations such as the American Public Health Association (APHA) have released statements in support of CSE starting in Kindergarten, asserting that “all young people need the knowledge, attitudes, and skills necessary to avoid HIV, other sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and unintended pregnancy so that they can become sexually healthy adults.” The authors of this statement cite a plethora of studies in support of CSE, including those that show that introducing this type of knowledge early on can actually protect our children from childhood abuse.

“If we’re really doing our jobs as parents and educators from the time children are young, tying all of this in with the relationships we have with one another,” Goldfarb said, “consent education becomes unnecessary or, hopefully, it becomes less necessary as they get older.”

A number of curricula already exist that lay out age and developmentally appropriate materials starting in kindergarten and spanning all the way through high school. There are the Guidelines for Comprehensive Sexuality Education, developed by the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States, for example, or the Our Whole Lives program, released by the Unitarian Universalist Association and intended for use by parents. More recently, Advocates for Youth released Rights, Respect, Responsibility. These curricula—and many more—recommend lesson plans to help kindergartners understand their bodies, to help sixth-graders learn more about gender roles and expectations, and to help high-school seniors learn more about their reproductive rights and about STD testing. The missing ingredient in many cases, according to De La Rue, is funding. Many schools also struggle to foster an environment in which unhealthy sexual behaviors aren’t tolerated.

“I think we should teach [sexuality] the way we teach every other topic in school,” says Schroeder. “Start basic. Build that scaffolding in a way that is age and developmentally appropriate.” Both Schroeder and Goldfarb give as an example the way schools approach math education. “My son is learning algebra now in the eighth grade,” says Schroeder, “but it’s not the first time he’s getting math. It’s antithetical that we wouldn’t do the same with sexuality.”

Do study participants have the right to know?


Children born after assisted reproduction at greater risk of congenital malformations; doctors should be prepared to inform parents of these risks, scientists say

Gothenburg, Sweden:  Couples considering undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatment should be informed about the increased risk of congenital malformation posed by the use of ART, the annual conference of the European Society of Human Genetics will hear today (Monday).  Dr. Géraldine Viot, a clinical geneticist at the Maternité Port Royal hospital, Paris, France, will say that she believed that most doctors working in ART clinics in France only told couples about such risks if they were asked specific questions.

Dr. Viot and colleagues conducted a survey in 33 French centres registered for ART, around one third of the total number of clinics registered to perform ART procedures in France. All ART births from these clinics from 2003 to 2007 were included; 15 162 children in total.   The study was the largest to date on this subject.  Questionnaires were completed both by the parents and the paediatrician and the prevalence of malformations found compared with the data obtained from national registers and in published papers.

“We found a major congenital malformation in 4.24% of the children”, said Dr. Viot, “compared with the 2-3% that we had expected from previous published studies. This higher rate was due in part to an excess of heart diseases and malformations of the uro-genital system.   This was much more common in boys. Among the minor malformations, we found a five times higher rate of angioma, benign tumours made up of small blood vessels on or near the surface of the skin.   These occurred more than twice as frequently in girls than boys.”

However, the scientists say, their results are a long way from the 11% of major malformations that have been reported by some studies.  “Given that our study is the largest to date, we think that our data are more likely to be statistically representative of the true picture”, said Dr. Viot.

The average age of the parents of children born with malformations was not statistically different from the other parents in the ART group.  The origins of the malformations are probably multiple, says Dr. Viot.  “We need more research in order to understand the relationship between embryo culture media, timing of embryo transfer, the effects of ovarian stimulation, the use of ICSI, where sperm is injected directly into the egg, freezing of gametes and embryos and these disorders.

“We estimate that in France some 200 000 children have been born after ART and therefore a malformation rate of this magnitude is a public health issue.   It is important that all doctors and also politicians are informed about this.   We also need to follow up all children born after ART and to put much more effort into trying to understand which of the procedures involved is implicated in this problem.”

Dr. Viot and colleagues intend to follow up their work analysing a further 4000 questionnaires, from children born in 2008, and to look at the motor development of children born in 2003, who are now aged 7.   “By following all these children we hope to understand more about not only what can go wrong after ART, but why it goes wrong”, she said.  “At a time when infertility is increasing and more and more couples need to use ART to conceive, it is vitally important that we find out as much as we can about what is causing malformations in these children, not only so that we can try to counteract the problem but also in order for health services to be able to plan for their future needs.”

The scientists are now trying to find out the origin of parental infertility for each child born after ART who has been affected by major malformation or epigenetic disorders.  “With this knowledge, we can better establish the origin of the malformation and whether it is more likely to be related to parental infertility or the ART procedure itself”, said Dr. Viot.  “We already know that imprinting disorders – where the mechanism in which gene expression depends on parental origin – are clearly more frequent in our cohort than in the general population.”

Imprinting disorders are all acquired because of either a maternal or paternal deletion on a chromosome, through inheritance of both chromosomes of a pair from only one parent, through mutations in some imprinted genes, or because of loss or gain of methylation (a process which is normally removed during zygote formation and re-established through successive cell divisions during development.  “The prevalence of the imprinting disorder Beckwith Wiedemann syndrome in our cohort is six times higher than we would expect in the general population, and for retinoblastoma the prevalence among ART children is 4.5 higher than in the general population”, said Dr. Viot.

“These results could be due to the effect of a number of different mechanisms. They could be due to the infertility itself, the ovarian stimulation for supernumerary oocyte production, the in vitro maturation of oocytes, the use of ICSI (direct injection of sperm), the culture media, the cryopreservation of gametes and embryos – we just don’t know at present.  Finding this out will be a major step towards improving the health of children born after ART.

Source: European Society of Human Genetics – ESHG