#NOMANDATES

Preserving Medical Choice

Letters

Barbara's Letter

June 17, 2015

Dear Mr. Carrie,

This is my first time writing to my Member of Parliament, and I hope you can help. I apologize in advance for the length of this email.

I am contacting you to express my concerns regarding the CMA’s (Canadian Medical Association) proposal to mandate vaccines and remove a parent’s right to informed consent. I support the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which makes this a great country and upholds our right to autonomy over our own bodies and those of our children. This proposition by the CMA seeks to remove that right for products that have come to be known as “unavoidably unsafe”. Where there is a risk of injury or death, no matter how small the perceived risk may be, there must be a choice.

Ontario is one of only a few provinces that require proof of “immunization” for school; this includes either the immunization record or a signed and notarized form of conscientious objection. Parents must already take an extra step to inform themselves firstly about vaccinations, and secondly the path that must be taken to decline the vaccinations in order to attend school. As per the National Report on Immunization put out by the Public Health Agency of Canada states, “It must be emphasized that, in these three provinces, exceptions are permitted for medical or religious grounds and reasons of conscience; legislation and regulation must not be interpreted to imply compulsory immunization.” The CMA’s proposal goes against the Public Health Agency of Canada’s statement.

The CMA’s code of ethics includes in part the following;

1. Consider first the well-being of the patient.

2. Practice the profession of medicine in a manner that treats the patient with dignity and as a person worthy of respect.

3. Refuse to participate in or support practices that violate basic human rights.

4. Respect the right of a competent patient to accept or reject any medical care recommended.

Here again the CMA’s proposal is direct opposition to their own code of ethics. One of the most prominent reasons cited for mandating childhood vaccines is for the greater good of our society as a whole. Unfortunately this is a large fallacy. Firstly, we know that vaccines are not 100% effective leaving a portion of the vaccinated population unprotected even after all recommended doses. Secondly, vaccine- induced immunity does not last a lifetime; in fact it is synthetic immunity. I would hazard a guess that many, if not most adults have not received boosters and any immunity that may once have been conferred has since waned. I am glad I was purposefully exposed to measles, mumps and chickenpox as a child thanks to my informed mother. I now have lifelong natural immunity to these conditions as confirmed by titer testing by my doctor.

Remember when these mild conditions were a right of passage as a child? Media hysteria has been drummed up over the past few years by those profiting by vaccines, namely big pharma. Thirdly, many of the vaccines on the schedule are not designed to prevent transmission of the disease, but simply prevent disease in the individual. For more information on this I would refer you to a very well versed Doctor of immunology who wrote a letter of opposition to bill SB277 in California. http://www.globalresearch.ca/vaccine-legislation.../5447672 Formaldehyde, aluminum, thimerosal, and polysorbate 80 are only a few of the ingredients found in many vaccines. Why would I purposefully inject these toxins into my baby? What impact are these toxins having on my baby’s short term and long term health? We now have a generation of children with the highest rates of asthma, autism, learning disorders, allergies, diabetes, obesity, autoimmune disease and cancer we have ever seen.

We do not know everything there is to know about the human body or our immune system, but more and more links are being found between the damage caused by interfering with the body’s natural immune system and the state of health of our children. The CDC, FDA and Health Canada use the very studies produced by the vaccine manufacturers to determine vaccine safety and efficiency. As we have seen with the recent CDC and Merck Whistle blowers coming forward that data can and has been manipulated to gain market approval. Most vaccine trials are only studied for reactions for a few days to a few weeks after vaccination and there are no studies into the long term health effects of vaccines.

Did you know that no studies have been done to test the current vaccination schedule in the US and Canada? Check out the increase in the vaccination schedule from 1983 to 2015 for the USA.

Canada’s schedule is very similar: There have been no national studies comparing the health of the vaccinated to the unvaccinated either. We should not be forcing an entire generation of children to receive vaccinations with so many questions unanswered. Unlike in the US, Canadians have absolutely no recourse if they are injured by a vaccination. This would mean mandating a procedure to which the creator of the product is safe from any lawsuit and has no incentive to improve their product to make it safer or more effective. Looking at the American compensation program (VICP) established in 1986, they have paid out over $2.8 billion to families whose children have died or suffered other adverse reactions.

It would be unethical to mandate a medical procedure where there is no liability. This proposed mandate by the CMA ignores and eliminates the fundamental Canadian value of choice as well as a doctor’s ethical obligation to provide their patients informed consent. If we are not free to make informed, voluntary decision about which pharmaceutical products we are willing to take, then we are not free in any sense of the word. If this bill passes it will set a very dangerous precedent and there will be no limit on which individual freedoms can be removed in the name of the greater good. As you can tell I feel very strongly about this issue, and I know of many other Canadians who share my feelings. We are grouping together and speaking out for the sake of our children, and to remind the government of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Thank you for taking the time to read my letter.

Barbara E*******, and my healthy un-vaccinated son Tom.

Porche's letter

I wrote to MP Kennedy Stewart regarding the charter of health freedom as a way of starting a repport with him before bringing up vaccines later. Below is the letter and his response.

"June 11, 2015

Kennedy Stewart
4658 Hastings Street
Burnaby, British Columbia
Dear Mr Stewart,
First I must thank you for your continued service and stance on the pipeline. As someone who can physically see the Burnaby tank farm from her home, the pipeline a visceral issue to me.
However today I am not contacting you in regards to the pipeline. Today I am contacting you regarding the Charter of Health Freedom. This charter's aim is to ensure the rights of Canadians in pursuing traditional medicines in their medical care.
This particular charter is important to me because I have had to learn natural medicines due to the fact that I have multiple drug allergies and my child seems to express a similarly negative reaction when he has received medications. I am allergic to 3 of the most common antibiotics and 2 of the most common prescription pain killers. 
My son had his teeth badly damaged from the one and only antibiotic he had. 
If it were not for a plant based medicine I would have to take serious risks with medication to control his seizures. 
Thanks to a plant based remedy he no longer suffers 30+ seizures throughout the day and he is no longer developmentally delayed.
Easy access to these things has turned my sons long term quality of life 180 degrees and drastically improved my own health.
You can learn more about the charter here: http://www.charterofhealthfreedom.org/
 
Thank you kindly for your time and consideration.
Best Regards,
Porche and my son Tulkas"

And this is his response.

"Dear Porche, thank you for taking the time to contact me. I am so glad to hear that your and your son’s health have drastically improved. Since I was elected, I’ve heard from many constituents who, like you, want the right to access and choose from a wide variety of natural health products (NHPs). My NDP colleagues and I are working to address the issues surrounding accessibility, regulation and approval when it comes to NHPs. I am definitely going to take a look at the resources available on the Charter of Health Freedoms website you provided.

 

Thank you again for contacting me.

Best wishes,

Kennedy Stewart"

 

With the election being called I emailed MP Stewart again and now await his response.

"

August 5, 2015
Kennedy Stewart
4658 Hastings Street
Burnaby, British Columbia

Good day Mr. Stewart!

I'm sure this email finds you busy and possibly stressed with the election officially being called (F*ck Harper lol).
We all know that the pipeline is a key issue locally but there is one other that may surprise you as being extremely important to your constituents. The CMA has proposed the idea of mandatory vaccination. This is highly concerning for many reasons. Most families choose to vaccinate but do not wish for mandates because they prefer to have the option of saying no to a new vaccine they may not view as safe. Others may only choose to avoid a single vaccine like the HPV vaccine.
Consideration of any mandate is a dangerous infringement upon the basic medical rights of Canadians. Under Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms we are guaranteed the right of bodily autonomy. Additionally the Patient’s Bill of Rights ensures the right of informed consent. Canada is only one of 2 G8 nations with no compensation program for vaccine injury. This leaves families with the full financial and medical burden of caring for their loved one without recourse in the event of a vaccine induced injury. Please know that supporting mandates on vaccination undermines the basic rights and support for the families of this nation.
The families you represent do not seek to remove vaccines or to lower their use, only that their right and especially their child's right to good health and personal choice in their medical care be maintained.
Best regards,
Porche Berry and Tulkas"

Genevieve's Letters

Genevieve started writing to her MP and other politicians a few months ago and has agreed to share the correspondences with us.

"Good snowy morning Bruce,
Thank you so much for your reply. I really appreciate it especially since I've written Verlyn many times over the years and never garnered any response (but that's a discussion for another time). I value the thought you've put into your position and I do see the side and I understand your reasoning however that when there is risk there must be choice, and informed consent cannot truly be given under government coercion.
There are absolutely risks to vaccinations and when we mandate we are choosing to harm some children for the "greater good" in some instances children will even die. Vaccine manufacturers have complete immunity, you cannot sue them for compensation if your child is injured, even if your child dies from a contaminated batch there is no recourse for the manufacturer. In the US they have a tax funded compensation court that has paid out over 3 billion dollars to vaccine injured peoples (note that there is no compensation program in Canada). In the 20 years from 1990 to Nov 2010 the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) database in the US recorded 352,650 reports of vaccine adverse events, which may not seem like a lot but according to Former FDA Commissioner David Kessler's JAMA article entitled
"Introducing MEDWatch: A New Approach to Reporting Medication and Device Adverse Events and Product Problems"
"Only about 1% of serious adverse events are reported to the FDA" which means by his own estimate there have been around 35.2 million adverse reactions in those 20 years of recording! There has never been a single study of the health of the vaccinated vs. the non-vaccinated and there has never been as study of the cumulative effects of the entire vaccine schedule. We regularly give vaccines at the same time but we haven't tested or studied the effects of them together, that doesn't sit well with me.
Even if someone is vaccinated it is not guaranteed that they will have long term immunity and those recently vaccinated with "live" vaccines can shed the virus for up to six weeks. If we are truly worried about those who are immunocompromised should we not have those children recently vaccinated with MMR, Rotavirus, Chickenpox and influenza stay home from school to prevent disease transmission?

When I wrote Dr. Swann about how I felt about his proposed mandate he replied to me that what he wanted was for parents to make an "informed choice".
The thing is I feel that I am informed, I've spent countless hours reading books, pubmed, JAMA, and BMJ articles, talking with my Dr. and most importantly I've listened to my mother's intuition about what vaccines to give. My children's health is not something that I take lightly! I worry about how my children will develop with every exposure to my neighbours spraying round-up, with every bite of non-organic GMO altered food, and with every potential vaccine if they were mandated. I feel that before any government mandates vaccines they better do their due diligence and get rid of the other immune stressors in our children's lives to reduce the risk of vaccine injury because we are seeing the effects of our current cumulative environmental exposures and it is scary!
1 in 13 kids have a food allergy, 1 in 2 of our boys will get cancer in his lifetime, 1 in 3 girls in hers, 8.5% of our population has asthma, crohn's and colitis is costing Canadians 2.8 billion dollars every year, 1 in 68 boys has ASD, 42 people a day are diagnosed with epilepsy the majority of them under the age of 10, and by 2020 over 10% of our population will have diabetes. This generation of children will not outlive their parents. We are in a health care crisis and it isn't from the measles! I have to wonder if we've traded short term illnesses for long term chronic disease. I see studies linking vaccines to all of those conditions listed above so should it not be up to the parent to decide which path and which risk they wish to accept?

I'm not expecting you to answer me back on this and I'm not looking for a debate about it, there are absolutely pluses and minuses to both sides of the vaccine issue. I just hope you will read and consider what I've said if you do discuss this at the Legislature. This is not a clear cut issue and like I say, where there is risk there must be choice."

 

This was Swann's response:

"

Genevieve thankyou for writing.

Informed choice is precisely what is needed – no one can be forced to take a treatment without full consent. Mandatory choice means parents who opt out will be asked to review the medical evidence on risk and benefit and sign a paper to that effect.

Children would not be excluded unless and until an outbreak of illness (such as measles or whooping cough) in which case the exclusion would be for the duration of the incubation period to protect that child and prevent its spread in the community.

Sincerely

David Swann MD,MLA"

 

"Good morning Premier Prentice,
My name is Genevieve Martens, I live in W******** with my husband and two young children. I am writing you today to urge you to stand up for parental rights and push back against the mandatory vaccines for school entry policy that the Liberal Party is putting forward. I believe that parents have the right to make informed decisions for their children without threat or coercion from the government. Vaccination is a medical procedure that is not without risk, as a matter of fact they are classified "unavoidably unsafe" by the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act in the US. How can we ask parents to submit to a medical procedure that carries risks such as Guillian-Barre, Encephalitis, Brain Damage, Anaphylaxis, Seizures and death in the hope that we will provide our communities with a little bit more "herd immunity"? According to the charts provided here by Health Canada vaccination rates have increased, not decreased since 2002. We are at herd immunity threshold numbers for most of the diseases we vaccinate for so why are we trying to take away the rights of the few who choose not to vaccinate?

In exchange for having reduced childhood disease we now have a generation of children with the highest rates of asthma, learning disorders, allergies, diabetes, obesity, autoimmune disease and cancer we have ever seen. We do not know everything there is to know about the human body or our immune systems and whether vaccines are contributing to these diseases, the science is NOT settled! The CDC, FDA and Health Canada use the very studies produced by the vaccine manufacturers to determine the vaccines safety and efficiency and as we have seen with the recent CDC and Merck Whistleblowers coming forward that data can and has been manipulated to gain market approval. Most vaccines trials are only studied for reactions for a few days to a few weeks after vaccination and there are no studies into the long term health effects of vaccines. There have been no national studies comparing the health of the vaccinated to the unvaccinated either. We should not be forcing an entire generation of children to receive vaccinations with so many questions unanswered.

In the United States vaccine manufacturers have zero liability. In its place a portion of every vaccine sale is put into a government run program. To date there has been almost 3 Billion dollars paid out by the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program in the United States. In the 20 years from 1990 to Nov 2010 the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) database in the US recorded 352,650 reports of vaccine adverse events, which may not seem like a lot but according to Former FDA commissioner David Kessler's JAMA article entitled "Introducing MEDWatch: A New Approach to Reporting Medication and Device Adverse Events and Product Problems" "Only about 1% of serious adverse events are reported to the FDA" which means by his own estimate there have been around 35.2 million adverse reactions in those 20 years of recording!

In Canada we have no vaccine injury compensation program. Who will pay for the treatments of the children injured by these vaccines if they are mandated? Who will compensate the lost wages of the parents who have to stay home to care for their injured children? Who will be liable for vaccine injury? Will it be the government? Is our government prepared to care for and pay for vaccine injured children? Our ailing health care system and floundering budget tell me we are not.

I hope you will stand up for the rights of parents and children to decide for themselves, without threat of government recourse, what is right for them and their health. Every person has the fundamental right to decide what to inject or ingest into their bodies! I am deeply disturbed to think that our government feels it has the right to force medical procedures that carry very real risks onto its citizens."

"Dear Honourable Member Swann,
My name is Genevieve Martens and I reside in W******* with my husband and two young children. I am writing to inform you that as someone who has voted Liberal since I was first eligible to vote I will no longer be doing so. Anyone who thinks that parents should be forced, under threat of having their children removed from school, into consenting to a medical procedure that carries very real risks will never receive my vote. That is not informed consent, that is coercion. It is a fundamental human right to determine what we put into our bodies and I choose not to inject aluminium, formaldehyde, thimerosal, polysorbate 80, MSG and DNA strands from the eggs, dog kidneys, monkey kidneys and aborted human fetuses used in virus propagation into either myself or my children. 

Vaccines have been classified as "unavoidably unsafe" and have been linked to increases in asthma, diabetes, autoimmune disease, allergies, brain damage and death. The science is not conclusive when it comes to either vaccine safety or effectiveness. To date there has been almost 3 Billion dollars paid out by the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program in the United States. In the 20 years from 1990 to November 2010 the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) database in the US recorded 352,650 reports of vaccine adverse events, which may not seem like a lot but according to Former FDA commissioner David Kessler's JAMA article entitled "Introducing MEDWatch: A New Approach to Reporting Medication and Device Adverse Events and Product Problems" "Only about 1% of serious adverse events are reported to the FDA".

The CDC and FDA use the very studies produced by the vaccine manufacturers to determine the vaccines safety and efficiency and as we have seen with the recent CDC and Merck Whistleblowers coming forward that data can and has been manipulated to gain market approval. Most vaccine trials are only studied for reactions for a few days to a few weeks after vaccination and there are no studies into the long term health effects of vaccines. There have been no national studies comparing the health of the vaccinated to the unvaccinated. I strongly urge you to read Vaccine Epidemic by Louise Kuo Habakus and Mary Holland before you push a vaccine mandate onto the children in this province.

I am so utterly disappointed to see the party I have loved and supported all of these years go down the route of violating the freedom to choose what to put in one's body in exchange for public education.

I pray that you will have a change of heart in this matter."

Nicole's letter

Dear MP

I am contacting you to express my concerns regarding the CMA’s (Canadian Medical Association) proposal to mandate vaccines and remove a parent’s right to informed consent. I support the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which makes this a great country and upholds our right to autonomy over our own bodies and those of our children. This proposition by the CMA seeks to remove that right for products that have come to be known as “unavoidably unsafe”. Where there is a risk of injury or death, no matter how small the perceived risk may be, there must be a choice.

Ontario is one of only a few provinces that require proof of immunization for school, this includes either the immunization record or a signed and notarized form of conscientious objection. Parents must already take an extra step to inform themselves firstly about vaccinations, and secondly the path that must be taken to decline the vaccinations in order to attend school. As per the National Report on Immunization put out by the Public Health Agency of Canada states, “It must be emphasized that, in these three provinces, exceptions are permitted for medical or religious grounds and reasons of conscience; legislation and regulation must not be interpreted to imply compulsory immunization.” The CMA’s proposal goes against the Public Health Agency of Canada’s statement.

The CMA’s code of ethics includes in part the following;
1. Consider first the well-being of the patient.
2. Practice the profession of medicine in a manner that treats the patient with dignity and as a person worthy of respect.
3. Refuse to participate in or support practices that violate basic human rights.
4. Respect the right of a competent patient to accept or reject any medical care recommended.
Here again the CMA’s proposal is direct opposition to their own code of ethics.

One of the most prominent reasons cited for mandating childhood vaccines is for the greater good of our society as a whole. Unfortunately this is a large fallacy. Firstly we know that vaccines are not 100% effective leaving a portion of the vaccinated population unprotected even after all recommended doses. Secondly, vaccine induced immunity does not last a lifetime. Many adults have not received boosters and any immunity that may once have been conferred has since waned. Thirdly, many of the vaccines on the schedule are not designed to prevent transmission of the disease, but simply prevent disease in the individual. For more information on this I would refer you to a very well versed Dr. of immunology who wrote a letter of opposition to bill SB277 in California. http://www.globalresearch.ca/vaccine-legislation.../5447672 

Unlike in the US, Canadians have absolutely no recourse if they are injured by a vaccination. This would mean mandating a procedure to which the creator of the product is safe from any lawsuit and has no incentive to improve their product to make it safer or more effective. Looking at the American compensation program (VICP) established in 1986, they have paid out over $2.8 billion to families whose children have died or suffered other adverse reactions. It would be unethical to mandate a medical procedure where there is no liability.

This proposed mandate by the CMA ignores and eliminates the fundamental Canadian value of choice as well as a doctor’s ethical obligation to provide their patients informed consent. If we are not free to make informed, voluntary decision about which pharmaceutical products we are willing to take, then we are not free in any sense of the word. If this bill passes it will set a very dangerous precedent and there will be no limit on which individual freedoms can be removed in the name of the greater good.

And now we will wait for the reply. It will be added to this post.

Jordana's letter

"Doesn't the Green party Ontario stance on mandatory vaccinations conflict with the idea that the Green Party in general supports

freedom and civil liberties? Anything that has a risk, should be a choice. Where would forced medical intervention stop if vaccinations are forced upon people when the science is still incomplete? Why are medical Dr's the only way to gain an exemption when they learn nothing about the vaccines themselves and cannot be held accountable when an adverse reaction happens?

Are people who suffer adverse side effects from anti-depressants going to be forced to take anti-depressants because they might pose a risk to themselves or others?

Where does it stop?"

 

Below is their response.

"Hello Jordana,

Thank you for writing the Green Party regarding vaccinations.

The Green Party of Canada fully supports the use of vaccines for well-established public health risks like viruses. Our understanding is that vaccines are safe and offer significant benefits for children's health. Most medical experts agree that, while those recently vaccinated may contract the illness, they are more likely to have a much milder case and less likely to spread the disease.

However, we have not taken a position specifically supporting mandatory vaccinations.

Given that support of mandatory vaccines is a resolution of the Green Party of Ontario, I would suggest that you contact them to express your concern and raise your questions. Here is their email address: admin@gpo.ca

Thanks again for writing.

Pat D****

Volunteer."

Danielle's letter

Hi Elizabeth,
I have been meaning to write you a letter in response to information I have learned about the Green Party. I am finding it hard to find the time
to do this, so will send a quick note in reply to your email instead.
Let me start with saying that I have supported the Green Party of Canada for over 20 years. I really started taking an interest in not only just
voting green but keeping abreast of what was actually taking place in politics in Canada when I saw you debating with the other parties and
just fell in love with your brilliance. You hold yourself so well and are so knowledgeable about so many issues that you always have something intelligent to say in response to others comments.
I am deeply disappointed though to have found out that you and the Green Party support mandatory vaccination. There are a few things wrong with this.
The Green Party "was the first to raise the alarm on Harper’s “anti terror” bill - Bill C-51” and continues to fight for Canadians “to have the right to engage in free speech". Yet, the Green Party is willing to actively take away the right of Canadians to have freedom of choice, freedom of health and freedom to parent.
This support to mandate vaccines and remove a parent’s right to informed consent by removing religious and philosophical exemptions is
against what I would think the Green Party stands for. I support the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which defines this great country and upholds our right to autonomy over our own bodies and those of our children. This proposition seeks to remove that right for products produced by for-profit corporations, that time and time again have demonstrated serious side effects. Where there is a risk of injury or death, no matter how small the perceived risk may be, there must be a choice.
One of the most prominent reasons seen for mandating childhood vaccines is for the greater good of our society as a whole. Unfortunately this is a large fallacy. Firstly, we know that vaccines are not 100% effective, leaving a large portion of the vaccinated population unprotected, even after all of the recommended doses. Secondly, vaccine induced immunity does not last a lifetime. Many adults have not received boosters and any immunity that may once have been conferred has since waned. Thirdly, many of the vaccines on the schedule are not designed to prevent transmission of the disease, but simply prevent the disease in the individual.
Unlike in the United States, Canadians have absolutely no recourse if they are injured by a vaccination. In fact, we are one of only 2 G8
nations that do not have a compensation program for those injured by vaccines. This would mean mandating a procedure to which the creator of the product is safe from any lawsuit and has no incentive to improve their product to make it safer or more effective. Looking at the American compensation program, established in 1986, as our closest comparison, they have paid out almost $3 billion to families whose
children have died or suffered adverse reactions to vaccinations. It would be unethical to mandate a medical procedure where there is no
liability.
This support to mandate ignores and eliminates the fundamental Canadian value of choice as well as a doctor’s ethical obligation to provide
their patients informed consent. If we are not free to make informed, voluntary decisions about which pharmaceutical products that we are
willing to take, then we are not free in any sense of the word.
Also, another reason why I would think the Green Party would not want to support something like this is that the Party seems to put a lot of
importance on the environment and on reducing greenhouse gas emissions in particular, but what about pollution? Pollution is such a big
problem in Canada, contributing to so many environmental issues, such as oil spills (I have pictures of multiple dead crabs we found fully
intact on the shores of Cates Park in North Vancouver from our most recent oil spill that nobody was found responsible for), over use of
plastics, pollution of our waterways with garbage and sewage, pollution of our land, water and resources with toxins and poisonous ingredients (that are banned in Europe) in our every day products (shampoos, body washes, laundry and dish soaps, all purpose cleaners, etc) that are washed out into our ground water killing local habitat.
And what about pollution of our internal environments with vaccines? People cannot be expected to be engaged in cleaning up their outer
environment if they are being forced to pollute their inner environment. Vaccines are drugs. Manufactured by pharmaceutical companies for
profit. There are many studies that show vaccines cause damage. Why would the Green Party of Canada support something so against our
constitutional rights?
You titled this email “step up”. I’d like to ask that you “step up” and do some research on vaccines and remove your support for mandatory
anything with regard to forcing toxic harmful drugs on the Canadian population.
I am definitely not voting for and especially not donating any money to you or the Green Party, who want to force drugs on the Canadian
people. I cannot express how incredibly disappointed I am in this. I have also let everyone I know in my community, online and in person, of
this directive.
From a sad and very disappointed Canadian citizen who supports freedom of choice and the right to treat our bodies as we want and the
freedom of choice to parent as we see fit.
Danielle
The response:
Dear Ms. Danielle,
Thank you for your thoughtful letter regarding The Green Party of Canada's stance on vaccinations and I apologize for the delay in responding - we're a small team doing our best to keep up! To answer your question, the Green Party remains in favour of the use of vaccinations for well established public health risks, like viruses.
Vaccines have been scientifically proven to be effective in preventing diseases that carry harmful and potentially fatal consequences. For this
reason we believe that is important to ensure that our population continues to benefit from the life-saving protection that vaccinations afford.
According to the World Health Organization (WHO), only clean water performs better in reducing the burden of infectious diseases than
vaccines. I encourage you to read the article here.
In the same article, the WHO outlines the superior efficacy and safety of vaccinations over therapeutic medicines. Even in cases where a recently vaccinated patient contracts the illness, most medical experts agree they are more likely to have a much milder case and less likely to spread the disease. That being said, the Green Party supports ensuring that Health Canada continues to apply standards for vaccine approvals based on only the most advanced and most rigorous science.
Thank you again for your letter and I am sorry to hear we have lost your support. I hope you will consider supporting the Green Party again in the future.
Sincerely,
--
Hardie Rath-Wilson