Less Than A Week To Go: Did You Send Your Comment to the CDC?

By Catherine J. Frompovich

Since I’ve been writing about the unfortunate all-encompassing-health-freedoms-denial and full-force-of-law-power-grab the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has promulgated for itself in its Rulemaking published in the Federal Register https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/08/15/2016-18103/control-of-communicable-diseases#h-32 , I’ve received emails both thanking and encouraging me to write more.

One such email came from Dr Rima E Laibow, MD, the Medical Director of the Natural Solutions Foundation, who offered the foundation’s Tiny URL consumer action link that will send your comments automatically with one click of the “health freedom mouse” to your respective members of Congress, the President, your state legislators and governor, and the CDC.

USE THIS EASY WEB FORM ACTION ITEM:
http://TinyURL.com/InformedConsentProtection

The other day I received an email from an attorney in Louisiana who, in part, had this to say, which I think everyone ought to know:

It occurs to me that, whatever one’s views are on “forced vaccinations”, there is a constitutional right to refuse medical treatments under the US Supreme Court case of Mills v Rogers, 457 U.S. 291 (1982), because of the liberty and privacy interests in our own bodies, and under many such similar cases thereafter. Also, if vaccines were so safe, why has the special “vaccine court” awarded over 3 billion dollars in damages due to vaccine injuries to date?   [Personal CJF email]

I plan on getting back with that attorney to ask if I can network with him on issues, since he said, “Dear Ms. Frompovich, I’ve read your great research on geoengineering with interest, for years. Thank you, and please keep up your great work!”

That Louisiana attorney is not the only attorney who thinks there are constitutional issues surrounding forced vaccinations.  I’d like readers to consider what the District Attorney of Bexar County, Texas, said about vaccines causing autism and that he’d be willing to prosecute such a case in this 11 minute video

https://youtu.be/Pi9PNKW7w3Q?

Time is running out—October 14^th—is the comment closing date.  Please make your comment before it’s too late.   ACT NOW! http://TinyURL.com/InformedConsentProtection

Resource:

Mills v Rogers, 457 U.S. 291 (1982)
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/457/291/case.html
Page 457 U. S. 298

The Court of Appeals held that the patient’s interest in avoiding undesired drug treatment generally must be protected procedurally by a judicial determination of “incompetency.” [Footnote 11] If such a determination were made, further on-the-scene procedures still would be required before antipsychotic drugs could be administered forcibly in a particular instance. Ibid. [Footnote 12]

Because the judgment of the Court of Appeals involved constitutional issues of potentially broad significance, [Footnote 13] we granted certiorari. Okin v. Rogers, 451 U.S. 906 (1981)