Across America the right of parents to decide whether or not to vaccinate their children is under attack . Now California families are being targeted.
In February, Dr. Richard Pan (D-Sacramento) introduced a bill to herd parents into a doctor’s office for a lecture on vaccination before those parents would be allowed to exercise an exemption to mandated vaccinations .
The ostensible purpose of bills such as these is to provide parents “accurate” information about vaccines. Their real purpose is however to increase vaccination rates by propagandizing parents and making the exemption process more difficult. 
The bill’s press release reveals the type of misinformation parents can expect to receive at one of these mandated meetings:
AB 2109 Introduced as Public Health Experts Gather at Capitol to Help Prevent Repeat of California’s 2010 EpidemicThe implication is that exemption policy had something to do with the pertussis outbreak of 2010. This is simply false; there is no scientific evidence to support a connection.
A review emerging from the Infectious Disease Society of America confirmed: 
Pertussis Vaccine's Waning Immunity Caused California Epidemic. The…vaccine’s failure to deliver durable infection protection to children aged 7-10 years led to the 2010 California pertussis epidemicBesides, according to the California State Department of Health, as of March 2010:
Vaccination coverage in California is at or near all-time high levels The AB2109 press release also reveals a troubling relationship between this bill and a shadowy organization called the California Immunization Coalition. The CIC is an entity comprised of every vaccine-related vested interest imaginable.  The group’s dedication is not to accurate information but rather unbridled vaccination. Their web address immunizeca.org says it all.
In 2011 they were the driving force behind Teen Vaccine Week: an “observance” where the group encouraged teachers to engage their students in herd immunity propaganda sessions, the playing of Vaccine Jeopardy (like the TV show) and vaccine-related scavenger hunts. 
Is this the group who will be tasked with deciding what’s “accurate?” Will they ensure that we get, as their president Jeff Goad, called it “the right” information? 
And why are they so anxious to get us into the doctor’s office to address a non-problem anyway? For years the vaccine promoters have been studying parents to find out what “communication” techniques and talking points to apply in order to make us more malleable to the vaccine proposition. Noted spin doctors have been employed and have concluded that fostering vaccine demand “requires creating concern, anxiety, and worry.” 
But how do you create fear of mild illnesses while at the same time using accurate information? The answer is you don’t.
Besides, are doctors even providing accurate information in the first place? Based on my experience, the answer is no. For example Dr. Paul Offit, a vaccine industry luminary, is, when discussing the risks posed by vaccine-preventable illnesses, often wildly off base. He claims that, in the pre-vaccine era (the late 50s and early 60s) measles-related deaths numbered 3,000. In reality, according to the CDC  and others, deaths numbered only ~450.
Then there’s Dr. Glenn D. Braunstein, of Cedars-Sinai who, in a 2010 Huffington Post piece, asserted that vaccination wiped out typhoid  when in reality a vaccine had nothing to do with its demise.
Finally we have TV’s Dr. Nancy Snyderman. In February 2010 on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, she claimed:
Right now we have children dying in the United States of America from measles, mumps… 
In reality, no such deaths were occurring.
Is this the type of “reliable” information parents can expect to hear when dragged before the experts?
And since the purpose is to increase vaccine rates do you think doctors will tell parents that mortality from these illnesses was in virtual free fall long before the advent of vaccination?  It’s more likely parents will have to listen to the fallacious talking point that unvaccinated children “put the entire community at risk.”  This is of course laughably ridiculous. Here’s why.
The vast majority of people in America are protected by the vaccines they’ve already received. Besides, you cannot put someone at risk if you do not have an illness - and not vaccinating is not an illness. After all, do those of you who’ve declined this year’s flu shot believe that you, by simply existing, are putting friends, family and co-workers “at risk?” Of course not.
One would have to engage in a willful suspension of disbelief to imagine an accurate representation of the vaccine issue to emerge from a program designed by a consortium of vaccination-related vested interests. Yet despite a lack of popular demand for this type of legislation, we have, staring us in the face and threatening to become law, this egregious bill designed to strip parental rights simply because a few parents have chosen to exercise those rights.
And while not all of you may be worried about this specific issue, it’s important to remember that if parents lose the freedom to decide, without state involvement, what medical treatments their children will receive, what’s going to stop them from one day coming after you and the freedoms about which you care?
If you live in California, use the following link to contact your representative and demand your vaccine rights!
According to the textbook Vaccines (4th edition pages 1060-61):
The highest incidence usually occurs where water supplies serving large populations are contaminated by fecal matter. This situation existed at the end of the 19th century in most large cities in the United States...causing the disease to be highly endemic in large cities. With the introduction of water treatment at the turn of the 20th century...the incidence of typhoid plummeted precipitously in the large cities of the united states
And according to Arthur Allen, a great friend of vaccination and the author of Vaccine: The controversial Story of Medicine's Greatest Lifesaver:
Nationwide, the typhoid death rate declined 99 percent from 1906 to 1936, with little vaccination. P 137
*Paul Offit’s assertion regarding the measles appears on page 56 of his book Vaccines